Loading...
CC RES 2021-037 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPEAL AND THEREBY APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF ONE CITY- OWNED PINE TREE ON CITY PROPERTY (APN 7564-005- 900), ADJACENT TO 4353 PALOS VERDES DRIVE SOUTH, TO RESTORE THE VIEWS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPAIRED BY THE PINE TREE FROM THE VIEWING AREAS LOCATED AT 4332 AND 4324 ADMIRABLE DRIVE (CASE NO. CTRP2021-0012) WHEREAS, on April 29, 2021, the City's Community Development Department transmitted a memorandum to the City's Public Works Department recommending the removal of one City-owned pine tree on city property (APN 7564-005-900), adjacent to 4353 Palos Verdes Drive South (Case No. CTRP2021-0012), as the tree was found to be creating a significant view impairment from 4332 and 4324 Admirable Drive (Case No. CTRP2021-0012); and WHEREAS, on April 29, 2021, the City Staff notified the adjacent residents to the subject tree and the applicants of the tree removal recommendation; and WHEREAS, on May 14, 2021, an appeal of the Community Development Department's recommendation to remove the City pine tree was submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Tom and Deborah Berg, the property owner at 4353 Palos Verdes Drive South ("Appellant"), requesting that the City Council overturn and deny the tree removal recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Appellant's appeal raised the following issues with the Community Development Department's recommendation: 1)The tree was present when the appellant purchased their property twenty years ago and they have maintained it and paid to have it trimmed and laced annually; 2) The tree has become a community landmark; 3) Many neighbors have commented on the,beauty of the healthy tree and enjoy standing beneath to gaze at the ocean; 4) The neighbor immediately behind the appellant has an unblocked full view of the cove and a sweeping ocean view and what he will see if the tree comes downo will be house rooftops and not the coastline; 5) The appellants voluntarily keep the tree in good condition and have responded to any request by the same neighbor to trim it even though they do not own it, 6)The appellants offer to trim two feet as a compromise; and, 7) Should the Council remove it, the appellant requests an acceptable replacement tree be planted by the City; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 2021, a 15-day public notice of the public hearing was published in the Peninsula News; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2021, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence, at which time the City Council voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to August 3, 2021, to allow time for Staff and the City's Arborist to consider the feasibility of trimming the tree by means of crown raising and/or reduction; and WHEREAS, on August 3, 2021, the City Council held a public hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The above recitals are hereby incorporated into this Resolution as set forth herein. Section 2: Based on the evidence and testimony included in the Staff Report and provided at the public hearing, minutes, and other records of proceedings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Section 12.08.110 of the RPVMC, the sole criteria the City considers when recommending removal of the tree is whether the tree significantly impairs the view. The Appellants did not provide sufficient evidence that the tree does not significantly impair the view of the ocean and shoreline from 4332 and 4324 Admirable Drive nor do the Appellants provide any compelling arguments, within the criteria of Section 12.08.110 of the RPVMC or the View Restoration Guidelines Section V, subsection (B)(6)(a), that Staffs recommendation to remove the tree is in error or that removal of the tree is not warranted. B. The pine tree impairs the ocean and shoreline view from both 4332 and 4324 Admirable Drive. Significant impairment of the view is based on the City's Guidelines and Procedures for Restoration of Views Where Foliage is Involved. Section V, subsection (B)(6)(a) of the guidelines state greater weight should be given to prominent landmarks, such as the shoreline, when considering the severity of the view impact. Furthermore, greater weight should be given to view impacts that are considered "multi-component" meaning that the foliage that impairs one component of a multi-view element, is considered a significant view impairment. In this case, the Applicants' multi-component view is comprised of the ocean, Catalina Island and the shoreline. The subject pine tree due to its sizable width and dense interior branch network, impairs the ocean view and significantly impairs the shoreline view (Portuguese Bend and Inspiration Point shoreline) from the viewing area at 4332 and 4324 Admirable Drive. Moreover, because the subject tree impairs one component (shoreline) of a multi-component view from 4332 and 4324 Admirable Drive, and impairs a prominent landmark (shoreline), the tree has been determined to significantly impairs the view, pursuant to the criterion found in Section V, subsection (B)(6)(a) of the City's Guidelines and Procedures for Restoration of Views. Resolution No 2021-37 Page 2 of 4 C. Furthermore, trimming the tree to restore the shoreline views, by crown reduction and crown raising is not feasible. The City's View Restoration Arborist opined that crown raising and crown reduction to restore the shoreline views would seriously stress the tree and weaken limbs that would create a future public safety hazard. He also opined that the combination of crown raising and crown reduction, whereby the top of the canopy is removed, would cause a decline in the health of the tree and likely kill it. Given that trimming the tree to restore the shoreline views would create a public hazard and that the tree would likely die as a result of trimming, the City Council finds that the tree needs to be removed. D. A replacement tree will regrow rapidly into the protected views and is therefore not recommended. Section 3: For the foregoing reasons and based on the evidence and testimony included in the Staff Report and provided at the public hearing, minutes, and other records of proceedings, the City Council hereby denies the appeal and orders the following at the City's expense: A. The removal of one City-owned pine tree on City property (APN 7564-005- 900), adjacent to 4353 Palos Verdes Drive South. B. If technically feasible, stump grinding of the removed tree. If stump grinding cannot be performed, the tree stump shall be flush cut to the ground. Section 4: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt under Class 4 (Section 15304). Section 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage, approval, and adoption of this Resolution, and shall cause this Resolution and her certification to be entered in the Book of Resolutions of the City Council. Section 6: The time within which judicial review of the decision reflected in this Resolution must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Resolution No. 2021-37 Page 3 of 4 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 3rd day of August 2021. °C.i1/4):31-Q Eric Alegria, Mayor ATTEST: T- - Takaoka, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ) I, Teresa Takaoka, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2021-37, was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on August 3, 2021. ITY CLERK Resolution No. 2021-37 Page 4 of 4